Court Allows Corzine to Freeze Aid to Poor School Districts

By RICHARD G. JONES and DAVID W. CHEN

Published: May 10, 2006

Handing Gov. Jon S. Corzine an important budget victory, the New Jersey Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to allow financing for the state's poorest school districts to be frozen at last year's levels.

The court accepted the governor's contention that the New Jersey's budget situation is so dismal that the state must be allowed to take drastic steps to reduce overall spending.

The ruling was the third the court has made in the last five years granting permission to cap new spending on the poorest districts. It represented a modest step back from a landmark series of court decisions known as Abbott v. Burke, which required New Jersey to provide enough money to 31 poor, mostly urban districts to bring their financing levels up to those of the state's wealthiest districts.

Mr. Corzine argued that because of a $4 billion deficit, those districts should forego $160 million in additional aid.

The request, fraught with the risk of eroding some of Mr. Corzine's liberal and progressive base, highlighted the governor's desire to cut or hold the line on spending in his $30.9 billion budget proposal.

In their unanimous seven-page ruling, the justices gave the districts a May 31 deadline ''to resubmit their 2006-07 budgets consistent with the revenue sources'' that take into account the spending freeze.

On two other occasions in recent years -- in 2002 and 2003 -- the court also agreed to freeze spending at the previous year's level because of budgetary concerns.

The court's ruling on Tuesday, however, differed from those earlier decisions by addressing Mr. Corzine's concerns about waste and mismanagement. The court ordered audits of four districts -- Camden, Newark, Jersey City and Paterson -- to be completed by November. Audits of the remaining Abbott districts are to be completed in time for the preparation of next year's budget.

In a statement, Mr. Corzine acknowledged the significance of the audit requirement as a way to increase the accountability of the school districts but did not frame the court's ruling as a victory.

''Our focus will be to get resources to the children,'' he said. ''We must meet their needs and prepare them for the challenges they face upon graduation. Only when that goal is met, and not a moment sooner, will we have achieved a victory.''

Richard E. Shapiro, a lawyer for several of the Abbott districts, said that the court's ruling preserved the essence of the Abbott decisions and praised a provision in this latest decision that allowed districts the right to appeal a budget decision.

The Corzine administration had argued against giving the districts the right to appeal their financing levels.

''The kind of basic drift of the court's order has been no different from the past,'' Mr. Shapiro said.

He conceded that the ruling put the onus on districts that appeal the spending freeze to prove that, as the court put it, ''an identified demonstrably needed program, position or service will be substantially impaired due to insufficient funding.''

But he said the requirement is ''no different than what the district's burden has been in the past. It affords opportunity for districts to show the need for additional funding and services and positions that are demonstrably needed by the children. It protects those programs. And in that regard, we're very pleased that the districts will have a right to demonstrate those needs.''

Peter G. Verniero, former attorney general and state Supreme Court justice, said the court's decision might bring short-term budget relief but questioned whether it could be sustained.

''The governor will consider this a big victory in the context of this year's budget, but when you look at the long term and the fine print of the court's order, it may not turn out to be so big a victory,'' he said.

David G. Sciarra, who represents the Abbott schoolchildren, said the ruling underscored the importance of collaboration between the state's Education Department and the districts.

''It is critical for the department and districts to work cooperatively and finalize school budgets that meet the children's needs, even where more funds are necessary,'' Mr. Sciarra said in a statement. ''The court is also holding state officials accountable for performance. The department now must ensure Abbott funds are effectively used, the Abbott programs are evaluated and Abbott reforms are stabilized.''